Jump to content

How much does a "green" phone matter to you?


pyroscott
 Share

Recommended Posts

Migrated from Original Forum. Originally Posted 18 January 2012

 

First we saw Sprint release the Samsung Replenish, which had many components made of recycled materials as well as being largely recyclable. We were enticed to buy it because it was an Android smartphone that had the $10 monthly fee forgiven. It was easy to dismiss the first phone to meet

UL ISR 110 standards as a way for Sprint to reach out to earth-friendly buyers, but it may have just been the start to a sweeping change for Sprint. It is being reported by ecogeek.org that "Sprint hopes to have 70 percent of its handsets meet the certification by the end of next year." That's a lofty goal, but it has been in the works for a while with sprint already requiring packaging to be earth friendly.

 

So, how do you feel about your next phone possibly being earth friendly? Do you love it? Hate it? Not care?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Migrated from Original Forum. Originally Posted 18 January 2012

 

 

I believe we all are responsible for the environment and I applaud Sprint for reaching to be a "green" company, which all businesses should strive for since recycled materials are in abundance and the price point in using these materials are now in the realistic category. Sprint is also doing well in that regard as making it's campus more green friendly. However, Sprint's efforts in making green phones comes across as cheesy. So far, the phones have had so-so performance and geeky colors chosen are not attractive. The phones just look like a gimmick to appeal to the tree-huggers.

 

Sprint just needs to make a statement that it will use recycled components as necessary and make its line up look professional whether its a high or low end phone. Once it achieves that goal, sales of phones will continue, and the tree-hugger groups will bury Sprint in awards which they can recycle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Migrated from Original Forum. Originally Posted 18 January 2012

 

It doesn't matter. It will not affect my buying decision at all. If the phone has good build quality and nice specs then it might be my next. But it will be a nice marketing tool for Sprint to use. I could see them laying claim to being the "First Environmentally Responsible Carrier." Who knows that may sell a few extra devices, then everyone wins.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Migrated from Original Forum. Originally Posted 18 January 2012

 

Agreed. Sprint hasn't done much to push what its done corporately, and except for marketing the green phones, you don't hear any thing at all except for an award every so often. I think Sprint will go much farther if they used recycled components in all its phones, keep them looking high end and market that to the consumers and I'm sure Sprint will get a much more favorable response from consumers and green groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Migrated from Original Forum. Originally Posted 18 January 2012

 

I would take their green movement more seriously if they offered a flagship quality phone that met the UL IRS 110 standards. I agree with you legion, the phones they have released have been underpowered and in my opinion, used their "green" status as a selling point instead of the attributes of the phone. The LG Viper doesn't meet the UL IRS 110 standards but is still greener than most other phones. It, however, is another midrange phone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Migrated from Original Forum. Originally Posted 18 January 2012

 

For me, it bears little weight. I wouldn't buy a phone that I thought was inferior in specs to get something green. Smartphones are terribly ungreen by their very nature.

 

That being said, if I was in the unrealistic situation where all specs were equal between two devices, I would go with the "greener" product. But in reality, how green a device is for me would just be an additional bragging point on a device I was already going to buy anyway.

 

- Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Migrated from Original Forum. Originally Posted 19 January 2012

 

Here's a good example of Sprints efforts. They seemingly keep improving in the background corporately but no big announcements regarding improvements and sustainability.

 

http://www.scpr.org/blogs/environment/2012/01/17/4291/sprint-moves-one-step-closer-sustainable-cell-phon/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • Great job on your analysis of small cells versus the 3.45GHZ and the population coverage requirements. I wonder if the fcc is stalling because they may address the key limitation of of 2.5: the convoluted frequencies. Not sure how they would get there, but it would be better public policy if you could actually use a single license in current times, ie 5, 10 or 20MHz. Of course they could also go in more of a nonprofit or small business direction. But most likely they will keep it as planned given how messy the transition would be. In many/most metro areas BRS/EBS is fully licensed. Would be nice if they put pressure on the squatters.
    • I didn't actually look at the buildout requirements before making that comment - they're definitely going to have to deploy on macro sites if they want to hit the buildout requirements. PEA001 has a population of 25,237,061, of which they will have to hit 45% in 4 years (11,356,677) and 80% in 8 years (20,189,649). If they were to cover the entirely, all five boroughs, of NYC using only small cells (something I'd say is impossible considering their current small cell density), they'd only be covering 32% of the population in the PEA. And this is with spectrum that only adds 300Mb/s per sector and will likely have only 50% the range of their current n41 equipment. Doesn't really seem worth it to me. I'm of the opinion that they're looking to hedge their bets in further EBS/BRS acquisition. 
    • These strand mounts also are deployed with Band 46 (LAA), in my experience. I have yet to encounter a strand mount with exclusively 2/66. 
    • Bought a esim "sim" card a few weeks ago that operates in all of my more current phones according to its app. It arrived a couple of weeks early from Berlin.  Now if my MVNOs would get moving and support more than iPhones and rarely Pixels so I can test this thing. https://esim.me The only item really troubling so far is reviews in google play store keep getting deleted, even 5 star ones.
    • Still waiting impatiently for my T-Mobile security update.  
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...